Boards

I decided, appropos of nothing, to re-read A CLockwork Orange - I've probably rad it about 12 times but haven't picked it up for a bit.

I was heartily enjoying said book until I realised that I was reading it on the tube surrounded by typical London types who probably thought I was reading it for the first time and it got me thinking - is there some sort of holier than thou hiearchy regarding at what time of life you read a book youre 'meant to'?

I remember throwing up for eternity with utter disgust and screaming for it to end through broken blooded teeth when a friend of mine said he'd 'only just started reading' Homage to Catalonia and he's 32 and by rights should be thrown into the sea surely?

but there shouldn't be at list of books which you must have read by a certain age. The most obvious example is the much maligned 'The Catcher In The Rye'; if I hadn't first read it at the age of 15, there is no way it would mean as much to me now

often reread books. but i have been rereading Last Exit To Brooklyn recently and i'm enjoying it possibly more than the first time I read it. Does the fact that I bought it after watching them talk about it on Dawson's Creek make me a loser?

care about what you're reading. Also being annoyed at someone who hasn't read a classic at 32 is strange. If we're meant to have read everything that is considered classic by the end of our youth then what do we read when we're old?

Although I did fall in love with a woman who came in the pub on her own the other day, ordered a pint of lager, sat at a table and read her book (something about Caravans or something), let out a tiny but audible burp and popped out for a cigarette on a couple of occasions, without putting her coat on. I love her, whoever she is.